| 查看: 2741 | 回复: 14 | ||||
| 当前主题已经存档。 | ||||
| 当前只显示满足指定条件的回帖，点击这里查看本话题的所有回帖 | ||||
marineman至尊木虫 (知名作家)
爱八卦爱生活
|
[交流]
大家对Plos One的影响因子如何预测？
|
|||
|
请评价！！！ [ Last edited by bingyulin3 on 2008-12-28 at 09:15 ] |
回复此楼» 收录本帖的淘帖专辑推荐
 学术借鉴 |
» 猜你喜欢
写了一篇“相变储能技术在冷库中应用”的论文，论文内容以实验为主，投什么期刊合适？
已经有6人回复
-
带资进组求博导收留
已经有10人回复
-
最近几年招的学生写论文不引自己组发的文章
已经有11人回复
-
需要合成515-64-0，50g，能接单的留言
已经有3人回复
-
中科院杭州医学所招收博士生一名（生物分析化学、药物递送）
已经有3人回复
-
临港实验室与上科大联培博士招生1名
已经有8人回复
-
想换工作。大多数高校都是 评职称时 认可5年内在原单位取得的成果吗？
已经有4人回复
|
http://pbeltrao.blogspot.com/200 ... -impact-factor.html Guestimating PLoS ONE impact factor Abhishek Tiwari did some analysis on the number of citations that PLoS ONE is getting so far using Scopus database. We had a small discussion over the numbers on FriendFeed and I ended up looking at different set of values also from Scopus. I tried to predict the first Impact Factor for PLoS ONE that might be out sometime this year. Before showing the numbers I will repeat again that I think the IFs of the journal where a paper is published is a very poor measure of a papers importance. Although it is probably a good measure of the relative value of a journal (within a given field) we should be striving to pick what we read based on the value of a paper instead of the journal. The Impact Factors that will be published this year are calculated as the total number of citations from 2008 to papers published in 2006 and 2007, divided by the number of citable units in 2006-2007 (articles and reviews). The data I am looking at is from Scopus so it varies a bit from the one in ISI. The variability comes from the decision of what to include as "citable" articles and from the journals that are covered in Scopus versus ISI. One problem I found with Scopus data was that, for some journals, the database has multiple entries due to small variations in article titles. For PLoS Biology, PLoS Computational Biology and PLoS Genetics the number of articles published should be less than half of what is reported. This does not appear to be the case for PLoS ONE. I downloaded the tables of published articles and tried to removed redundancies looking at the tittles and authors. I counted only articles and reviews as citable items but used all articles published in 2006-2007 to get the number of citations in the year 2008. I also did the same calculations for the impact factor of the previous year to be able to compare with the data from ISI. The results were comparable but not the same. In summary, PLoS ONE might get an impact factor of about half of the expected for PLoS Computational Biology. The usual disclaimers should be said: I have no idea of how complete Scopus data is and how exactly it relates to ISI. [ Last edited by darwinists on 2009-5-1 at 14:37 ] |
10楼2009-05-01 14:35:26
2楼2008-12-12 09:10:29
marineman
至尊木虫 (知名作家)
爱八卦爱生活
- 应助: 486 (硕士)
- 金币: 25437.6
- 散金: 7934
- 红花: 36
- 沙发: 1
- 帖子: 7687
- 在线: 278.1小时
- 虫号: 255556
- 注册: 2006-05-28
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 等离子体物理
3楼2008-12-12 09:20:30
★ ★
cxksama(金币+2,VIP+0):鼓励新虫，感谢积极回复 4-24 23:25
cxksama(金币+2,VIP+0):鼓励新虫，感谢积极回复 4-24 23:25
| PLoS One现在还未收录到SCI中，因此今年ISI可能不会统计它的2008年影响因子了。不过，有人早已利用Google Scholar对PLoS One在2007年发表的文章进行了引用统计，结果计算出其IF=5.68。虽然他们没有统计该杂志2006年文章的运用情况，但PLoS One在2006才刊登137篇论文（而2007年为1229篇），所以对统计结果影响不大。就算2006年全部文章引用为零（这是不可能的），PLoS One的IF也达到5.11。所以说，2008年PLoS One的影响因子应该在5以上。 |
4楼2009-04-24 23:19:51